Secrets To Cutting Heavy-Equipment Costs
Reducing Fuel Consumption
Like all businesses, heavy equipment construction/development companies save money by reducing the difference between gross and net profit. Costs create the chasm between gross profit and net profit. The logical conclusion, then, is obvious: cut heavy equipment costs.
Cutting costs is the only means of closing the gap between construction gross and net profit.
But, cutting costs is one of the most challenging objectives in business.
There are countless variables to manipulate in heavy equipment construction. But, there are a limited number of viable means of cutting costs.
Two Types of Heavy Equipment Costs: Owner and Operating
In the heavy-equipment construction industry, two types of costs drive a wedge between gross profit and net profit. In the heavy equipment industry, there are owner costs and there are operating costs.
Ownership Costs Un-Cuttable
According to renowned construction economist Dr. R. L. Peurifoy, ownership costs are those that do not affect daily operations. The purchase of a machine — minus the cost of tires — is an ownership cost. Taxes and emissions tags are ownership costs.
With the exception of cutting costs when purchasing a machine or truck, it is difficult to reduce ownership costs.
Taxes, permits, licenses, tags, etc. have a fixed price.
It is operational costs allow for the greatest cost-cutting flexibility.
Cutting Operational Costs without Sacrificing Quality
Operations costs include things like parts and repairs; upgrades and new technologies; wages, salaries and per diem; and fuel. While there are a larger number of operational costs a company can cut, cutting operational costs is risky.
Cutting operational costs comes with consequences. There are a limited number of costs a construction/development company can cut with respect to operations. Cutting the wrong costs means devaluing the company.
The consequences of cutting the wrong operational costs devalue a company.
Cutting wages means employee attrition. Hiring inexperienced drivers or operators means producing a lower quality of work and paying for inefficiency and mistakes. Purchasing inexpensive replacement parts — cheap tires for example — typically means paying to re-replace the same parts sooner than later. Cutting employee compensation, purchasing cheap parts, and making inexpensive repairs adds up to greater expenses over the long run.
Most costs are necessities and cutting the cost of necessities means sacrificing quality.
Cutting fuel costs is the one exception.
Cutting Diesel Fuel Costs is Effective and Efficient
Diesel fuel consumption minimization is the one exception to the cost-cutting-versus-sacrifice-of-quality conundrum. Cutting diesel fuel costs is the exception because doing so does not necessitate a reduction in fleet nor operations quality. Cutting fuel costs can not only increase profit, it can increase production value by making operators more efficient.
Not only is cutting fuel costs the most efficient means of cutting operational costs, it is the most effective.
Fuel is the second most expensive operating cost.
Save wages, cutting fuel costs saves more money than any other mode of minimizing the gap between gross and net profit. Moreover, when crude oil is expensive, diesel fuel costs are nearly comparable to wage and salary costs.
Diesel fuel is an extraordinary operational cost for heavy equipment companies. Without question, cutting fuel costs is the best means of cutting operational costs without lowering equipment and production standards.
Pre-Combustion Rentar Fuel Catalysts, Atomizers, Engine Idle Reducers
Reducing the amount of fuel a machine uses is the most effective, efficient means of cutting costs. At least, it is the best means available that will not negatively affect production potential or fleet quality. As illustrated, there are a finite number of options with respect to cutting operating costs.
Likewise, there are a limited number of options for cutting diesel fuel costs.
Purchasing cheaper diesel is not a sound business plan because: For one, a company typically only saves a few cents per gallon. Secondly, cheap fuel is almost always lower quality. While those few cents add up, they do not add up to a sum that significantly lowers operating costs.
The only option, then, is to get more production out of each gallon of diesel fuel.
There are two means of getting more production out of each gallon of fuel. The first solution: the use of technology that increases the energy output of each unit — gallon or liter — of fuel. The second is to increase operator efficiency.
Rentar Fuel Catalyst
Understanding why Rentar engineered a pre-combustion fuel catalyst is simple. Diesel, just like all fuels, is not a homogeneous, evenly-mixed liquid. The elemental components of diesel clump together in congealed molecular bonds. The naturally uneven state of diesel fuel leads to an incomplete burn.
The Rentar Fuel Catalyst is a mechanical device. A cylinder lined with precious metals, the Rentar breaks up the molecular bonds within a diesel fuel mixture. Laboratory tests consistently prove the Rentar Fuel Catalyst will reduce fuel costs by between 3% and 8%.
The Rentar is a pre-combustion, pre-carburetor fuel atomizer.
So effective at cutting diesel fuel costs is the Rentar that hundreds of organizations and companies have given it raving reviews. They include the U.S. Navy, the United States Marines, Coca-Cola, and the City of New York to name a few.
The Rentar will pay for itself within 12 months. So effective is the Rentar Fuel Catalyst at cutting diesel fuel costs that Rentar guarantees its pre-combustion fuel catalyst. Not once has a Rentar Fuel Catalyst failed to pay for itself within the guaranteed time.
Most Rentar clients see a return on investment within 9 months, some a quickly as 3 to 6 months.
And, the metals in the Rentar do not erode, corrode, degrade, breakdown, or wear. Theoretically, the Rentar should last forever. So simple, well-designed, and soundly engineered is the Rentar Fuel Catalyst that it comes with a 10-year warranty.
For companies interested in cutting costs without sacrificing quality or production, the Rentar is guaranteed to do so.
GPS Equipment Tracking Devices
Idle time constitutes one of the largest wastes-of-fuel in the heavy-equipment construction/development industries. Even moderate estimates rarely put production-time-per-hour at more than 50 minutes. However, rarely does an operator kill an engine when not operating, when sitting idle.
In many cases, idle time can constitute as much as 20% to 30% of an hour. It is not uncommon for an operator to sit idle for 15 minutes out of an hour. Doing so with a machine’s engine running is extremely costly.
A GPS equipment tracking device allows fleet managers, crew superintendents, and company owners to monitor idle time.
A GPS heavy equipment tracking device can record machine movement, movement speed, engine RPM, and load weight. Tracking devices are a means of evaluating the fuel consumption efficiency of an operator and an operation.
Engine Idle Reducers
Companies and equipment owners can equip machines with engine idle reducers if the machine has an engine speed lever or selector switch. Engine speed levers and selector switches are a means of controlling engine RPM apart from the accelerator. Machines like excavators, roller packers, and backhoes have engine speed levers and selector switches.
Engine idle reducers prevent a machine from idling at high RPM. Engine idle reducers drop engine RPM if an operator doesn’t engage the machine within a given time.
Like GPS tracking devices, engine idle reducers increase operator efficiency, diesel fuel waste being the most costly.
High-Pressure Fuel Injectors
Again, reducing fuel costs is the most productive means of cutting operational costs. And again, atomizing fuel is the most efficient means of reducing diesel fuel costs.
In the last few years, machine manufacturers began experimenting with high-pressure diesel fuel injectors. Traditional injectors pump fuel into engine cylinders at pressures of 6,500 psi. New, experimental diesel fuel injectors pump fuel into an engine at 60,000 to 65,000 psi.
Though expensive, high-pressure injectors have proven to atomize fuel to a greater extent than traditional injectors. With the exception of cost, the only other drawback is the fact that such high pressures can degrade the engine.
Cutting heavy-equipment operational costs is simple. In part, that is because there is only one option that significantly reduces costs without degrading production: save fuel.
There are two means of doing so. A company can increase the energy output of diesel fuel. Or, a company can take measures to increase the efficiency of operators.
Or, a company can choose to do both in order to reduce operational costs.